Durant is something special wish Hawks had chance!

[AHF]

Quote:

---

I think the 3 BPG # is probably a stretch. Everything else is right where it should be. I'm happy to bet that his PPG + RPG + APG + BPG will be greater than 32.

---

Done. I think the last rookie to do that was Elton Brand. Not even Lebron James, Carmelo Anthony, etc. did that.

[bfwolf]

In LeBron's rookie season, he put up 20.9 ppg, 5.9 apg, 5.5 rpg, and .7 bpg for a total of 33. It can be done. And it's easier for a tall guy like Durant because of all the rebounds and blocks he can get.

PM me and we can arrange details.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

In LeBron's rookie season, he put up 20.9 ppg, 5.9 apg, 5.5 rpg, and .7 bpg for a total of 33. It can be done. And it's easier for a tall guy like Durant because of all the rebounds and blocks he can get.

PM me and we can arrange details.

---

You are right. I failed to carry a "1." That makes two players since Duncan was drafted in 1997. I'll take those odds, although I'll grant you that Durant is the right type of player to do it if he can put up double digit rebounds regularly or post some serious blocks/assists. He hasn't put up all that high block/assist numbers in college so I think that will turn on the rebounds. If he maintains his 3.2 r+a/pg in the NBA, he will need to average roughly a combined 29 points and rebounds per game. Possible but hard to do from the SF spot.

I propose a month of an avatar chosen by other player on the Squawk.

[bfwolf]

Ha! I like it. You got yourself a deal.

Although it's somehow less satisfying to bet with you, a reasonable guy who acknowledges that Kevin Durant is probably going to be fantastic but just doesn't like the odds of him getting to that 32 number in his rookie season, as compared to one of these maroons who are talking about Josh Smith being better than Durant. So I'll make the bet in the lighthearted way that it's intended, but you seem like too good a guy for me to feel really invested in proving you wrong.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

So I'll make the bet in the lighthearted way that it's intended, but you seem like too good a guy for me to feel really invested in proving you wrong.

---

Right back at you. Now the challenging will be making sure we remember this 13 months from now. If only there was a necromancer around who could raise threads from the dead....

[chillzatl]

but the truth is, he's NO different than Marvin was before we drafted him. His stats are better, but had Marvin been the focal point of his team, would they have been much different? He's the hype du jour of the moment and that's a fact.

If he came here and didn't dominate his first season, which he will not do in the NBA, most of you would be throwing him under the bus the exact same way you do Marvin now.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

He's the hype du jour of the moment and that's a fact.

---

LOLWTF

Durant is CPOY easily as a freshman. You don't become the player of the year on hype. Maybe some people here are getting a little carried away but averaging 24/11 with 2 blocks and 2 steals isn't hype.

[chillzatl]

projecting pro greatness on a freshman, regardless of his stats, is nothing but hype. His 24/11 in one year of college means nothing at the pro level. His draft status is based on projecting his progress against his undeveloped potential. Apart from his stats, he's no different than Marvin was in his draft year.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

His 24/11 in one year of college means nothing at the pro level.

---

So college production means nothing when evaluating what a guy will do in the pros? Being the CPOY as a freshman means nothing?

Isn't it a little early to be drinking?

This undeveloped potential business..... you just made that up or you haven't watched him play. The only thing undeveloped about Durant is his physique.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

projecting pro greatness on a freshman, regardless of his stats, is nothing but hype. His 24/11 in one year of college means nothing at the pro level. His draft status is based on projecting his progress against his undeveloped potential. Apart from his stats, he's no different than Marvin was in his draft year.

---

I have never seen a freshman in a "Big Six" college who produced like Durant and wasn't successful in the NBA. How do you figure his superstar production is nothing but hype or that it isn't a meaningful basis to project future NBA performance?

[chillzatl]

First off, it's never too early to be drinking.

Second, college developed isn't pro developed and that's a fact. He's not Shaq or Duncan, two of the most fully developed college players to enter the NBA in recent history. So he still has a lot of things to improve on at the next level.

He's an excellent college level talent who has a lot of potential to be very good, maybe even great, at the NBA level. I haven't read everything written about the guy, but I know I haven't read anything where the writer is stating that this guy is going to dominate the NBA, much less from d day 1. So yes, his draft status is based on his skill set + his potential to get better, as it is with nearly every player who goes pro.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

I have never seen a freshman in a "Big Six" college who produced like Durant and wasn't successful in the NBA.

---

Frankly i can't remember anyone in a major conference who produced like Durant as a true freshman. Melo was close, i remember Marbury was very strong, but other than that i am drawing a blank.

[DJlaysitup]

Quote:

---

...Frankly i can't remember anyone in a major conference who produced like Durant as a true freshman. Melo was close, i remember Marbury was very strong, but other than that i am drawing a blank.

---

Yes but other than his stats (production)...he's no different than Marvin was as a freshman (or was I for that matter).

[exodus]

Quote:

---

First off, it's never too early to be drinking.

---

I knew something was up.

Quote:

---

Second, college developed isn't pro developed and that's a fact. He's not Shaq or Duncan, two of the most fully developed college players to enter the NBA in recent history. So he still has a lot of things to improve on at the next level.

---

Durants year pisses on Duncan's and Shaq's freshman years from a high level.

YOu can't get any more impressive than being the CPOY as a freshman. I am not one of the guys on here that has been annoiting him for the HOF already but the only legit question mark about him is his weak frame. His skills pretty much can't be questioned, and you know i am a skeptic.

Of course none of this means he will have the impact of Shaq or Duncan, but trying to compare him to Marvin is pretty KBesque.

[Packfill]

Quote:

---

First off, it's never too early to be drinking.

Second, college developed isn't pro developed and that's a fact. He's not Shaq or Duncan, two of the most fully developed college players to enter the NBA in recent history. So he still has a lot of things to improve on at the next level.

He's an excellent college level talent who has a lot of potential to be very good, maybe even great, at the NBA level. I haven't read everything written about the guy, but I know I haven't read anything where the writer is stating that this guy is going to dominate the NBA, much less from d day 1. So yes, his draft status is based on his skill set + his potential to get better, as it is with nearly every player who goes pro.

---

Shaq was only a "fully developed" prospect in the sense he was physically superior to everyone else. He was not close to as skilled as he subsequently became.

To say Durant is no different then Marvin is laughable. You can definitely argue that Durant is no different then Carmelo, but given Carmelo's production I don't see why Durant would not then be worth the hype.

[chillzatl]

Quote:

---

How do you figure his superstar production is nothing but hype or that it isn't a meaningful basis to project future NBA performance?

---

I'm saying that 24/11 in college doesn't mean much in the NBA because college production rarely translates directly to the NBA. It's a nice number to support the notion that he has the potential to be very good in the NBA, but beyond that, it doesn't mean much at the next level.

So as I said, he isn't much different than Marvin was in his draft year. He's got great college stats and a lot of potential to be good at the next level. It's not taking anything away from him to say it, because that's simply how it works. And as I stated earlier, if we drafted him and he came in and didn't dominate his first season or two (which he most likely WILL NOT), he would be labeled a bust by the fans of this team, just like Marvin.

[chillzatl]

no, it's no different. It's only different because you've already made up your mind that he will be a dominant player at the next level. You aren't looking at the history of the NBA, which has emphatically taught us that college stats don't guarantee success in the NBA. How many players have put up GREAT numbers in college, gotten drafted high and then fizzled? A lot more than have made an impact in the NBA. The fact that you compare a guy who is doing it in the NBA now, to a college kid who is simply putting up great numbers in college shows that you buy the hype. That's perfectly fine, but it's also no different than (except for stats) the situation that surrounded Marvin in his draft year.

[chillzatl]

Quote:

---

but trying to compare him to Marvin is pretty KBesque.

---

Sorry, but it's not. He's not a guaranteed superstar at the NBA level and only his biggest fans would try to say he is. He's an excellent college player who will be drafted high (if he comes out) because of his potential to get even better at the NBA level. It was exactly the same way for Marvin and like Marvin, he probably won't live up to the hype in his first year or two. If we drafted him, that would cause many to label him a bust.

The entire purpose of my first post was to point this out. People talk about him like he's a once in a lifetime player and they are freaking out at the opportunity to draft him, but his situation, skillset and prospectus isn't much different than Marvins was at the same point. So we have people freaking out over a player who, apart from his college stats, which don't guarantee anything at the pro level, isn't much different than the guy we already drafted and is now hated upon by many.

If it weren't for rose colored glasses, sour grapes and the bitter taste of irony, this site would get no traffic.

[bfwolf]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

How do you figure his superstar production is nothing but hype or that it isn't a meaningful basis to project future NBA performance?

---

I'm saying that 24/11 in college doesn't mean much in the NBA because college production rarely translates directly to the NBA. It's a nice number to support the notion that he has the potential to be very good in the NBA, but beyond that, it doesn't mean much at the next level.

So as I said, he isn't much different than Marvin was in his draft year. He's got great college stats and a lot of potential to be good at the next level. It's not taking anything away from him to say it, because that's simply how it works. And as I stated earlier, if we drafted him and he came in and didn't dominate his first season or two (which he most likely WILL NOT), he would be labeled a bust by the fans of this team, just like Marvin.

---

Why even bother responding to this guy? You can't argue with the insane.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

but his situation, skillset and prospectus isn't much different than Marvins was at the same point.

---

There is nothing, i repeat nothing, undeveloped about Durants skills. That is the whole point. Marvins skills are still developing, Durants aren't.Durants skills compare favorably with current NBA All-Stars. And Marvin never took over games in the clutch like Durant has done.

Durant's height, shooting ability and ability to handle the ball/shoot off the dribble will make him a nightmare to guard.

Quote:

---

He's not a guaranteed superstar at the NBA level and only his biggest fans would try to say he is.

---

That was true of Shaq and Duncan as well. Nobody is guaranteed anything.